Showing posts with label idiot. Show all posts
Showing posts with label idiot. Show all posts

Saturday, May 19, 2012

Thirty? Thirty.

I got an email yesterday from a friend and all the email said was "Blood pressure feeling low?  Read this one:"  Then there was a link to a news story about a one 33-year old Desmond Hatchett.  And let me just tell you, my friend was right.  My blood pressure went from very sedentary to near coronary attack.  Consider this a warning that the same thing could happen to you!

What we have could be seen as just a regular ol' story about a guy who would like a little bit of his child support payments to be cut back.  He's having a hard time getting his minimum wage job to make ends meet for himself and his children.  But that's where any sense of normalcy stops in this story.  See, Desmond is the father of not one, not two, not even ten, but thirty children!  That's right.  Thirty.  And get this:  The oldest is fourteen.  So, let's do the illegitimate math here, shall we?  He managed to seed thirty children in 19 years.  Good thing that he managed to have four babies in one year...TWICE.  Other wise, I don't think that he would have been able to achieve such a status in such a short period of time.  But that only takes care of eight kids.  He still managed to squeeze in another twenty two children in only twelve years.  For all intents and purposes, that's two kids per year.  Did I mention that there were eleven (ELEVEN) different women involved in this sperm factory gone awry?  Yeah, there were.  Eleven.  Eleven stupid, stupid women.  

Now Desmond works a minimum wage job.  Hard to imagine that someone who would be so irresponsible as to have thirty children in fourteen years would only be qualified to work a minimum wage job, isn't it?  But I will give him credit for at least working and at least trying to do one thing right.  There's that.  It's not much and really, I'm not sure that it counts for anything.  But I guess that I appreciate his working at all.  And out of his minimum wage paycheck, the state garners the maximum fifty percent to go for child support.  As you can imagine, trying to spread fifty percent of a minimum wage paycheck isn't going to go very far.  And it doesn't.  Some of the mothers only receive $1.49 per month in child support.  And NO, I did NOT misplace the decimal point there.  That's one dollar and forty-nine cents in child support.  Aside from it being insulting, why would you bother?  There are so many things wrong with this story that I don't know where to start OR where to stop.  I do know that my blood pressure is likely to require medication before I'm done typing all of this out.  (Thanks for that, CW!)

Minimum wage in Tennessee is $7.25 per hour.  Holy crap.  Assuming the Father of the Year works a full work week of forty hours, he's looking at a whopping $290 per week.  Let's take out a third for taxes.  That's right around $96.  Now we're looking at $204 per week.  Split that in half and Desmond is taking home $102 per week.  Maybe a little more if I wasn't accurate with what gets taken out for taxes.  $102 divided by 30 (as in children) comes out to exactly $3.40 per month, per child.  That's just insane.  And pointless.  Look, even though I think that the guy should be financially responsible for all of his children, what in the hell good does $3.40 a month do anyone in this situation?  How about if all of the mothers rotate and every month, one of them gets the $102?  If they go by the $3.40 a month plan, they're only getting around $36 a year from him.  Doing it this alternate way practically triples that income for them!  But I digress.  

This is as big of a fuster cluck as there could ever be.  He's currently petitioning the state of Tennessee to help him with his child support payments.  What is supposed to be done in a situation like this?  It's lose-lose all the way around.  I think that the only rational thing to do here would be for the state to agree to step in IF Desmond gets snipped.  There HAS to be a doctor out there who would perform that surgery on Desmond for free.  Hell, I'm not a doctor and I'D gladly do it! I'd also gladly chop it right on off for him, but I'm pretty sure stuff that like isn't allowed.  (Probably only because I'm not licensed, though.) I also think that the women who he repeatedly impregnated (and who KNEW about his situation beforehand) need to agree to some counseling in order to receive any sort of benefits.  You have a weird way of looking at things if you're hooking up with this guy and not caring if you get knocked up.

And you know, while they're at it, might as well get ol' Desmond a little counseling too.  What in the hell goes through his mind in the situations that he gets himself into that will inevitably result in him impregnating someone AGAIN?  Back in 2009, he did an interview with something called VolunteerTV.  It went something like this:


"Do you intend to keep having children?" WVLT asked.
"No." Hatchett replied.
"You're done?"
"I'm done. I'll say I'm done."
"What made you say that?"
"I didn't intend to have this many. It just happened," Hatchett said.


Jesus.  Where do I start?  I guess with the obvious.  It didn't just happen!  He's not the unluckiest guy in the world, though I'm starting to believe that he may be the stupidest.  I should also point out that at the time of that interview, he only had 21 children.  Now he has 30.  You know.  Because it just happened.  Now, not only is my blood pressure through the roof, my head hurts from pounding it on my computer desk.  IT DIDN'T JUST HAPPEN, DAMMIT!  Uh-oh.  There go my lungs.  Breathe.  Breathe!  


Can we hook him up with Octomom?  They seem like they'd be a perfect fit for each other.  Both are totally clueless and surrounded by children.  He might be able to teach her a thing or two about at least trying to make a living.  And she could teach him a thing or two about doing masturbatory porn as a means of support.  Hmm.  That might not be the best idea after all.  Forget it.  Sterilize both of them and let them go at like rabbits. 

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, April 18, 2012

Millionaires Don't Need Food Stamps

It's always nice to hear when at least someone comes to their senses. In this case, the person coming to their senses is Attorney General Bill Schuette of Michigan. Mr. Schuette decided to press fraud charges against a one Amanda Clayton because after she won a million dollars in the state lottery, she continued to collect food stamps and public assistance. You got it. Wins a million dollars. Thinks she's entitled to food stamps because she "isn't working". Riiiiiight. Good for Mr. Schuette.

According to the New York Daily News, Ms. Clayton is "...accused of collecting $5,475 in food stamps and public medical benefits over eight months". Just let that sink in. She wins a million dollars (OK, a $735,000 lump sum as opposed to the million being paid out in installments) and continues collecting money from the state because she "isn't working". Benefits aren't based on JUST whether or not you're working, cupcake! You have money! You don't need assistance! It's right there in the name! Assistance!

But for some reason, there seem to be a lot of unnecessary questions or some confusion over this most excellent move by Mr. Schuette. Naturally, some of the opposition comes from Ms. Clayton's defense lawyer, a one Stanley Wise, who said "They want to make an example of her...She's offered to repay the money. They haven't even sent her a bill. If that were the only issue, it would be over and done. They have chosen to exploit this for their purposes, and we have to deal with it." Yeah, see, it doesn't work like that. When someone gets caught stealing like a laptop, it doesn't make it OK if they just give the laptop back and say, "My bad!" As far the whole making an example out of her, I say good! I'm just sad that people even need this sort of an example. ("Citizens, I'd like to give you an example of what not to do. For example, if you win a million dollars, do not continue to take food stamps when you are perfectly capable of buying your own food. For example.)

Her mother isn't exactly seeing this for how it is either. Euline Clayton said that "...her daughter used bad judgment but that a criminal case is "crap"." You see, ma'am, most criminals use bad judgment. That's part of the criminal code of conduct. (Rule One: You must use bad judgment, as good judgment will cause you to not commit crimes.) She also noted that "The charges "are very extreme. ... They arrested her like a vulture...She didn't steal $1 million." I don't understand any of that. Arrested her like a vulture? So they circled her until she died and then they feasted on her rotting carcass? I don't think that happened. And no one is saying that she stole a million dollars. She stole $5,475. That's plenty.

The article also mentions that when a one Joy Yearout, a Schuette spokeswoman was asked "...why the attorney general chose felony charges over a civil lawsuit or why Clayton was arrested and locked up overnight for a non-violent crime", she declined to comment. I really wish that Ms. Yearout had answered with something to the effect of "We chose felony charges because she committed a felony." Seems simple and straightforward enough to me. It was kind of a stupid question to begin with if you're asking me. As far as being locked up for a non-violent crime, it might shock people to learn that people get locked up for non-violent crimes all the time. If they weren't locked up, they probably wouldn't be considered "crimes", per se. I wish I knew who made that inquiry. I'd really like to give them the answers that they so sought.

I hope this chick goes down. Yep, that's right. I'm hoping that they make a nice big, fat example out of her and all of her non-violent crime which stole taxpayer money from its originally intended purpose. If you'd like to see a video of this little snowflake in action, here's an interview that she did when she was approached by a reporter. Get ready to be angry, though. Very angry.

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, December 21, 2011

Incorrect Delivery Technique

Hey, FedEx guy! I know that it's Christmas time and that you're all busy with a ton of packages and everything, but relax. There's no need to be throwing packages that contain computer monitors over the fence! One, it's rude. Two, I'm pretty sure that your job description has something in it about not throwing things that you're delivering. Just a guess. I've never worked for FedEx, so it's entirely possible that I'm wrong. But I have a hard time believing that the tossing of packages over a fence is not frowned upon within the FedEx establishment. Check it out below. Not cool, FedEx. Not cool at all.



Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, July 12, 2011

Darwini Missed One

I don't know how Darwin missed the guy in the video below. He (Darwin, that is) must have been on vacation when the moron in the video below decided that it would be a good idea to feed (yes, feed) a crocodile. In a swamp. By means of wading in and holding some sort of tasty treat above the crocodile's head. And somehow, the guy ends up in one piece at the end of it. I did not see that coming. Maybe this guy just got lucky and happened upon the world's oldest crocodile. Or maybe it was a depressed crocodile and just didn't have the gumption to chomp the guy into his lunch. Whatever it was, I'm just going to guess that the guy in the video won't make this his last attempt at feeding the wild crocodiles by hand. Thus, I'm pretty sure that it won't be long before I show you a video of this same guy after Darwin got wind of this. I always wonder just how stupid some people can be. And then I see stuff like this and I realize that the answer is very. Very stupid. (Oh, and if the video doesn't load, click here.)

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, February 19, 2011

How Not To Move A Mattress

Today, we have a case of an event gone awry. But not just any event. It's an event which you wonder why it ever took place to begin with. It's an event which more than one person needed to concur that it was a good idea. It's an event in which both of those things seem completely impossible. They're definitely hard to explain.

Take the case of a one Timothy Lee Walker, 48-years old (and old enough to know better) and a one 42-year old Stella Thomas (also old enough to know better). According to
MSNBC, one or both of these dimwits bought a mattress and were taking it home themselves. Naturally, they had neither the vehicle, nor the equipment with which to transport a mattress from one place to another. (Why is it that nine times out of ten, if someone is moving a mattress, they do not have a truck? I've never understood that. It's like some weird unwritten law of nature that if you don't have a truck, you're going to have to move your mattress. It's practically guaranteed.)

Now, most people, when transporting a large object that they have to put on top of their vehicle, tend to use some sort of tethering utilities to secure said object to said vehicle. Those can range anywhere from rope and twine to nylon cords and bungee cords. And that's just to name a few. You know what is noticeably absent from my list? That's right. The human body. See, Mr. Walker decided that a good idea for keeping the mattress on top of the vehicle was for him to lie down on top of the 1996 Ford Explorer while Ms. Thomas drove the moron and the mattress to their destination. You want to guess how that turned out? Poorly, that is correct.

Surprisingly, Mr. Walker "...fell from the vehicle when...Stella Thomas, 42, rounded a curve, causing the mattresses to slide off the roof". I don't know how they thought that was ever going to work. Mr. Walker's condition was such that he "...was taken by helicopter to a hospital". At the writing of the scant article (which is probably about as extensive as Mr. Walker's problem solving skills) "His latest medical condition wasn't known". Well, while his latest medical condition wasn't known, I'm guessing that his latest mental condition could probably be guessed at with a great degree of accuracy. What a maroon. I wonder how she ended up getting the mattress home after he went to the hospital?

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Friday, February 11, 2011

Toads On Craigslist

Yesterday, we had what might have been the shortest "sex scandal" in Congress ever. Seriously, the only way that you knew that anything had even happened is because suddenly the guy resigned. And it was only 3-1/2 hours after the whole thing came out! Then when you hear something like that, that's when you get to hear why he resigned. It's all just very odd. And I really don't think that it's much to resign about. But then again, at least we won't have to hear about it for weeks on end. I hope.

Here's the deal: There's a New York Representative named Chris Lee. Now, Mr. Lee is a married bloke and he wanted to have an affair. From what I can tell, he did not have an affair...this time. But then again, when you're caught doing something, you're rarely caught on your first time out. Whether or not he had affairs before trying to have this one is beyond me. (Translation: He's been cheating on his wife for a while now. Pig.)

See, he was trolling Craigslist looking for a hookup and ended up being enticed by "...a 34-year-old single woman of "black/Irish" descent, who had advertised online for a "financially & emotionally secure" man" according to the NY Post. (Black/Irish descent? Begorrah, M-F-ers! Yeah, that joke really works best if you use an Irish accent. It's pretty good without it, but the accent really hits it home.) She apparently had written: "Will Someone Prove To Me Not All CL [Craigslist] Men Look Like Toads". Oh. I see. So, you're too good for Craigslist, and yet you're on Craigslist. This woman is bothering me already.

Representative Einstein replied to said ad with: "Hi, Hope I'm not a toad. :)". I can only assume that is when he sent the following picture of himself. Behold!



Good Lord, sir. What is that look on your face? Were you recently anesthetized before taking that pictures? And seriously, when are people going to learn how to take pictures with their phone without actually having to point the phone IN the mirror?! What the what?! I really have no answers. He apparently also included in his reply (along with that sexy, sexy photo): "I'm a very fit fun classy guy. Live in Cap Hill area. 6ft 190 lbs blond blue. 39. Lobbyist. I promise not to disappoint." Oh. Sure. Yeah, you seem classy. Because nothing says "classy" like a married member of Congress taking a shirtless picture of himself in his bathroom. Oh, yeah. It reeks of class. Reeks. And I guess that "promise not to disappoint" means...can get an erection? I'm a little unclear on that part, so I'm really just surmising at this point. I can't think of much else, though.br>

Of course, we all know now that he is not 39 and he is not a lobbyist. He is 46 and he was a Representative for the state of New York. He was also married at the time. Whether or not that plays out for very long after this fiasco, we'll just have to wait and see. Then again, if I was his wife, it wouldn't be so much about the affairs as it would be about his way of going about them. "Here I am in my bathroom without my shirt. Am I a toad?" Ugh. What a tool.

He did send along an explanation of the photo that he sent, saying: "I just took this one . . . I'm relaxing at home." You're just relaxing at home? Who the hell relaxes at home like that? In their bathroom, still wearing their dress slacks and (probably) their loafers and completely shirtless? Apparently, he wants someone to believe that he does. The woman who had originally posted the ad had similar questions to mine, asking him: "So do you always send shirtless pics to women from cl?" Lady, you're trolling for dudes on Craigslist! You can knock off the little coy act. You're no saint yourself, you know. And while that question was pretty bad, his answer is even worse.

The dude answers her and explains: "Sorry. It's all I had." It's all you had?! You took a picture with your cell phone! What, you cell phone doesn't work any more? The days of those sort of excuses are gone. Long gone. There is NO excuse for not sending someone a current picture of yourself. There's also NO excuse for not sending someone a picture of yourself where you are be-shirted. You could have taken a picture of yourself while your shirt was still on! Does he not get this sort of logic? He apparently did not! Even if you put the cell phone part aside, why would the ONLY picture that you would have of yourself be one where you don't have on your shirt?! Maybe he's just routinely shirtless. "I don't even know where to find a shirt. It's been so long. I haven't worn a shirt in years!" What a maroon.

And that's that. Once word of him and his shirtless stupidity got out (when the chick figured out who he was because he was dumb enough to use his real name, she went running to Gawker.com and I'm guessing sold them her story just like you'd expect a gem like her to do), he resigned. It's over. But there is one little side note I'd like to leave you with. Back in 2009, "...shortly after he helped pass the Student Internet Safety Act" (you read that right), he "...wrote an op-ed piece warning kids about the dangers of the Internet." He wrote: "Responding to what may seem like a friendly e-mail . . . can have serious consequences...Private information and images can so easily be transmitted to friends and strangers alike." That's good advice, son. Good ad-vice.

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Monday, January 10, 2011

Where Is The Logic?

There seems to be some ridiculous rumor going around about Facebook. No, no, it's not the usual crap about how they're going to change their page layout or anything like that. No, it's completely idiotic and I cannot believe that it has gained ANY traction at all, let alone enough traction to make it the top search over yonder at Google Trends yesterday. (That's right. The top search. A Congresswoman gets gunned down, a bunch of other people get shot, a bunch of other people get killed, and all people want to search for is G-D Facebook. We're so doomed.) So what is it that had people all a-flutter over the Innerwebs yesterday? Someone started a rumor that Facebook was permanently shutting down on July 15, 2011. Wait. What?

That's right. There is a rumor going around that Facebook, the multi-gazillion person social networking platform which is poised to make a gazillion dollars more than the gazillion that it has already made, is going to permanently shut down. And I don't know if I can editorialize on this insanity any better than the fine, fine folks over there at Urlesque did when they went with the headline: "Facebook Is Not Shutting Down on March 15. That's Stupid and You Should Feel Stupid." Very stupid.

The instant panic that seems to sweep the Internets (that's right; all of them) whenever something is mentioned about Facebook is disconcerting to me. But what's really disconcerting to me is that so many people couldn't simply noodle through the many reasons why Facebook would not be shutting down...ever. People really couldn't figure out that it was a hoax or a rumor on their own? They had to double check online with The Google? Wow. With those sort of problem solving skills, I'm surprised that they could even figure out how to use The Google. This is what you people care about? We're so scroomed.

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Sunday, January 9, 2011

It's Not Her Fault

While people are still running around trying to "figure out" what caused the loser who went on a shooting rampage in Arizona to go on said rampage, I'm going to mention something to you that I really didn't think would ever come up in the conversation. I mean really. In fact, when I heard this particular aspect voiced, I was actually stunned. I was actually surprised at how dense some people actually are. Me. Surprised. At the stupidity of people! I know! It seems unimaginable! But yet, it happened.

It's pretty simple and I'm just going to put it out there the way that I read it. Over at
ABC News, it actually says "Facebook executive Randi Zuckerberg bluntly asked, "Is Sarah Palin to blame?"

::: blink :::

::: blink :::


::: blink :::

::: blink :::

Um, what now? Sarah Palin? To blame? For shooting? She didn't shoot anyone! How is this Sarah Palin's fault? This Randi Zuckerberg needs a helmet. One of those industrial strength ones that I was talking about yesterday. Sarah Palin? Are you dry shaving me?! For cryin' out loud, what is wrong with you?!

I don't know what this whole Sarah Palin phenomenon is, but it needs to be studied by someone more capable than me. (Yes, I know. It's a tall order to fill. Moving on!) Let me say this in very simple terms. Sarah Palin is not responsible for the shootings in Arizona. Sarah Palin is not responsible for a lot of things. I am tired of hearing about Sarah Palin. I don't understand why she is either so beloved or so hated by so many. I really don't understand why she won't go away! She was barely a governor for half a term and an unsuccessful Vice Presidential candidate. Why does that give her so much attention after the fact?! Please. Let her go away. Fine, if her kid wants to dance in some TV dancing contest, that's one thing. But please let her go away.

Wow. If you hear about this sort of violent act taking place and your first thought is that it is somehow Sarah Palin's fault, there is something wrong with your thinking. There's also probably something wrong with you, but that's a whole different story. Also, if you are the sort of person that thinks that Sarah Palin is to blame for things like this (or for anything, really) please, for the love of God, please do not vote. Ever. (And don't "Rock the Vote", either. That was a bad idea from the get go.) Please just go about your daily business. You can even go about your daily business and continue to blame Sarah Palin for everything. That's fine. But for the love of God, please do not vote. Ever. And make sure you get a snug fitting helmet. You're going to need it.

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Friday, January 7, 2011

Some People Are Really Committed To Their Cause


On Thursday, those in the House of Representatives spent roughly two hours reading the US Constitution. What is slightly less remarkable than the document itself is the fact that it has never been done before. I don't know why I find that amazing, I just do. And for some reason that is currently unclear to me, they read a "...from the amended version of the founding document" according to Politicio. I don't know why it was amended. I mean, if you're going to spend at least two hours reading something, you might as well just read the whole thing the way it was written. Then again, not a whole that goes on up there on Capitol Hill makes any sense to me, so I don't know why this would.

Now, you would expect such a reading to be rather uneventful. But thank goodness, it was not! Nope, there was a whack job in the peanut gallery listening to all of this and waiting for just the right moment before making her crackpotness evident to all in attendance. A one 48-year-old (and old enough to know better) Theresa Cao of New York sat and waited until Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) was reading and Article II, Section 1 came up. Do you want to guess what section that is? Go on. I'll give you a minute. Constitution. Crackpots. Protesting. Not yet? What if I threw President Barry into the mix? Ah-HA! You figured it out, didn't you? The aforementioned jackwagon is a birther. Behold!


Good Lord. She even has a sign. Why am I surprised? Moving right along...Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution is the part which requires "...that only a "natural-born citizen" may be president". Yes. We know. But Theresa Cao seized that opportunity to start shouting, "Except Obama! Except Obama! Help us, Jesus!" Yes. Help us, Jesus, indeed. Help save us from folks like Theresa Cao. And as an officer removed her from the gallery, "...she yelled out "My name is Theresa." Thank you, nutjob. We have made a note. Here's another picture of her, complete with her megaphone. Wow, she's really into this isn't she?

I don't know how many times I have to say this, but I guess it's going to be a few more. President Barry isn't a Muslim and he isn't a Kenyan. He's a freaking socialist! If you're going to protest anything, for the love of God, protest THAT! Help us, Jesus, with that! For cryin' out loud. The video of said disturbance is below. If it doesn't work, clicking on the link to Politico above will take you to it and hopefully it will work there. Enjoy!

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Monday, January 3, 2011

First Bad Tattoo Of 2011


That didn't take long. We have our first idiotic tattoo/amusing mugshot of 2011 already! I know! Can you believe it? Well, when you consider that the perpetrator in this instance has already been arrested over fifty times, it's really not that hard to believe after all. (It's also not hard to believe that we don't get any explanation as to why this guy has been arrested over 50 times and is still out and about. But that's because the media still sucks just the same in 2011 as it did in 2010. I'm glad that we didn't have to get more than three days into the new year before that was apparent.)

It's your typical unnecessary death due to an idiot. From
CNYCentral.com we learn a couple of things. One of the things that we learn is that they need a better copy editor over there, as the address in the story is first reported as 1315 North Salina Street and is later, in the same article, reported as 1513 North Salina Street. But the other stuff we learn is that there was a party and some people got into a fight and one of the people decided to get all stabby on the other guy and killed him. Real nice.

The only good that can possibly come from something like this is that the scumbag who did this will (hopefully) finally be off the streets for good. Why someone who has been arrested over fifty times is still freely wandering about is beyond me. The only other good that I can think of is that we can make fun of him in his mugshot and his stupid, stupid tattoo. Behold!


That is a one asshat Malcolm Dame. Are we surprised that he's wearing a s***-eating grin on his face? Are we surprised that he's wearing a wife beater tank top? Are we surprised that he has a tattoo that says "Only God Can Judge Me"? I don't think that we're surprised at any of that. (OK, I'm a little surprised that his tattoo runs perfectly along the neck of the wife beater. You can't tell me that wasn't planned out that way.) But I do think that he will be a little surprised when he finds out that it isn't just God that can judge him.

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, November 25, 2010

You Can't Take Just ONE Day?

I hope you had a happy Thanksgiving. At the very least, I hope you had a nice Thursday. But you know who didn't have a happy Thanksgiving? That's right. Angelina Jolie. She hates it. She hates Thanksgiving. Wait. What now?

I've heard of people hating a variety of different holidays. I'm not a particularly huge fan of Arbor Day. That doesn't mean I'm against planting trees. I just don't see the point in having an entire day dedicated to the subject. Now, Thanksgiving? That's a little different. I can totally see the point in taking a day to give thanks, spend it with people you like (usually) and get paid for the day off. (Thank you FDR for mandating that it be held on the fourth Thursday in November.) But, surprise! Angelina Jolie doesn't see it that way.

According to the fine folks over there at PopEater, a one Rob Shuter tells us that "Angelina Jolie hates this holiday and wants no part in rewriting history like so many other Americans...To celebrate what the white settlers did to the native Indians, the domination of one culture over another, just isn't her style. She definitely doesn't want to teach her multi-cultural family how to celebrate a story of murder." Oh, for cryin' out loud.

And continuing alone in true Angelina style, the article goes on to say that "Angelina gets so grossed out by Thanksgiving that she has made sure her family will not be in America this year on Thursday." Good Lord.

Listen, Angie...through the history of time, across the world, across the entire world, civilizations have been formed by one group of people taking over and/or slaughtering another. This is not unique to America. If there's one thing I cannot stand it is those who feel so enlightened and feel as if they are acting so politically correct, but they're completely wrong about their basis for doing so. But that aside, it's not the point.


The point is that it is a day to give thanks. Maybe if she felt so strongly about it, she would use this day and her immense (yet, unfathomable) star power to do something about it. Then again, considering that she's wrong about her position on this particular topic, it would make her look like a damned fool to do so. That might explain some of it, but I don't think that it really does.


Here's someone who has the entire world on a platter placed before her and she can't see the point in a day to give thanks? Be thankful for your family? Be thankful for what you have? Be thankful for what your life is or is not? One day? She can't get into that? All right then. I knew there was a reason that she's always bugged me.

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, August 4, 2010

Keep Your Second Wife OFF Of Facebook

There's dumb and then there's just asinine. But what is it when you've gone past dumb and past asinine? Are you just so incapable of understanding anything at all and how it works that there isn't really a name for it? Or is the word that I'm looking for as simple as "idiot" or "moron"? It probably is, but this just seems like it require just a little bit more than either one of those. It's almost like the don't do the story justice, especially when the story is how a woman found out through Facebook that her husband had another wife. Wait. What now?

Correct. According to
WKYC in Cleveland, the woman, "Megan" as she preferred to be called for the story because she didn't want her real name used (nor did she want her humiliation to be spread far and wide and directly attributed to her), married her husband in 2005 in a ceremony in Italy. (I have no idea why WKYC thought that was relevant to the story, but they included it and so I did the same. If only they had questioned the relevance as I had, they might not have felt the need to include it at all.) After that "She knew her husband took a lot of business trips. Now she knows why." And while that's not entirely accurate (it's not like he was really on business trips, WKYC. Try to pay attention, would you?), his being gone a lot was explained when "Her relatives pointed her to the other woman's Facebook page where Megan discovered multiple photos of her husband and the woman together." Oh. Whoops.

Yeah. Whoops. Now, it's not like "Megan" didn't have some questions about what was going on in their marriage. "Megan said she first became suspicious when her husband claimed to have been in China and even brought back gifts for the kids yet his passport had been at home the entire time." It's unfortunate that the story doesn't delve more into how that was deal with in Megan's household. It seems a little difficult to explain, as that passport for international travel is pretty necessary. (Unless you're going to the United States, in which case just come on in like millions of other folks do every year.) But the media is crap these days, so what did I really expect?

I'll tell you what I expected. I expected people to be a little more discerning about what goes on their freaking Facebook page. But I guess this sort of thing happens all the time. What a weak act you people are. Seriously. You don't have the guts to just leave someone or to tell them that you're leaving? Instead, you leave it up to them to "accidentally" find out through pictures that were posted on Facebook? Seriously. Would you not know that there are people on your Facebook who are relatives or friends with the one of the other people involved in this and who will be seeing what is on your Facebook page? Or that of the whore that you're sleeping with? What is wrong with you people?

And it's not like just having the affair and having those pictures posted was enough for this guy and his extramarital bimbo. No, "A few weeks later, dozens of wedding photos also showed up on Facebook showing Megan's husband and his new bride." Dude. You're already married. You think that isn't going to come out at some point? Let me rephrase that, you moron. You think that this isn't going to come out at some point AFTER pictures of your SECOND wedding are posted on Facebook while you're still MARRIED? How can one be so dense and yet somehow manage to keep themselves alive through adulthood? It's a mystery.

Naturally, Megan wants a divorce. Her husband, not being all that bright to begin with, says "he doesn't believe he needs a divorce because he learned after the fact that the marriage paperwork was never filed correctly in Italy and therefor they were never married." Tell you what. How about if you don't get a divorce, but you let Megan go all Lorena Bobbit on you? That seems fair.

Look, I don't know about you, but I cannot imagine having an affair if I was in a relationship, let alone if I were married. It sounds simply awful to me. Not because of the deceit that is obviously present when something like that is going on, but because of the effort. It sounds positively exhausting. Trying to keep stories straight, trying to keep lies straight, trying not to get caught, trying to keep everyone happy, etc. Good Lord, why on earth would anyone voluntarily enter into such a mess? And this guy got MARRIED. TWO wives! Isn't one wife enough?! Isn't one wife plenty?! Isn't one wife more than enough on some days?

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content